Cheques move a step closer to extinction

DCodd

jambosans wrote: »

There are other methods of payment. Right now schools, clubs, small businesses etc may "prefer" cheques but they will adapt and adopt alternatives. Post 34 on this very thread being an example.

I am perfectly aware that cheques today are still the preferred method of payment on many occasions, and for certain consumer groups, hence the quote from the BBC Article in an earlier post on this thread.

I can't really see what the argument is about any more... It has not been announced cheques are being phased out, even though it is easily assumed from the removal of the guarantee card and their steady decline. It has been agreed there are still consumers who require cheques for which I again refer you back to my post on the BBC Article, which clarifies The Payments Council's stand point on this issue.

May I just point out one thing. We are a medium sized business and we use cheques for our suppliers and find it a cheaper and more manageable alternative to electronic means. We also do work for a number multi billion pound plc's and they prefer the cheque method of payment as many construction company software packages combine payment systems with project management software. The cheque is not dead!!!! Yet!!!

jambosans

DCodd wrote: »

May I just point out one thing. We are a medium sized business and we use cheques for our suppliers and find it a cheaper and more manageable alternative to electronic means. We also do work for a number multi billion pound plc's and they prefer the cheque method of payment as many construction company software packages combine payment systems with project management software. The cheque is not dead!!!! Yet!!!

I did not say the cheque is dead. However the cheque is definitely dying.

never-in-doubt

jambosans wrote: »

Who are you? The MSE Police?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

What? for saying not to quote grammar to us? Its a Money Saving forum, not an English exam

jambosans wrote: »

It had nothing to do with the discussion on cheques which this sentence seems to imply by telling me not to bother posting. I told you to read the sentence in context as the sentence in question was specifically referring to an exchange between myself and Inactive. It had nothing to do with the fact I didn't like what I was "hearing", it was to do with the fact that the exchange had taken the post completely off topic.

The exchange was on a public forum which means me or anyone else can add or say what we want, as can you! I was merely pointing out that you said you'd not converse and here you are - conversing!

By the way, it wasn't off topic - the basis remained the same, i.e. the original discussion!

jambosans wrote: »

I removed my comments and subsequent replies to Inactive to close the matter and return the post to it's original subject. However you decided to comment on something you were unable to read in full context (as my replies were deleted) and have now decided to make an issue out of some silly exchange you were not party to.

They were quoted by inactive - did you miss that? This means we can all see them in their entirety! Deleting them shows nothing, we can all see what you originally wrote! I commented on a post in a public forum and was privvy to all contexts, thanks all the same!

jambosans wrote: »

You were addressing a post that was in response to a series of exchanges with Inactive which he has left up but I decided to delete.

See above - same response!

jambosans wrote: »

I should've done the bigger thing and not replied to your post but I can't help a good argument. However for the sake of avoiding more stupid arguments breaking out I will shut up on this matter. :T

Noooo, don't shut-up I also like a good discussion (arguments are frowned upon ) so: round 3 'ding - ding' :beer:

Navvie

BarclaysManager wrote: »

We're not talking about improving a system, more about removing it.

No point in improving a system with declining usage, might as well toss £50 notes in a shredder.

If I was a gambling man I would have bet the farm that it would be you who would choose to reply to my post on the topic. Thank you for completely missing the meaning of my post and concentrating on the specifics of the language used.

Regardless, removing cheques as a means of transferring money from one entity to another would, by my understanding of the word, be an attempt to fix the system.

If cheques are to be removed from our world and replaced with money transfers, debit cards et al. the point remains. There seems to be little wrong with cheques, from a customer's point of view, and that any steps to improve the process of money transfer from one entity to another would meet my understanding of fixing a system which does not need to be fixed.

As a man who very rarely uses cheques - 3 cheques used since 2001, but who handles tens of cheques through my employment everyday - the arguments to the contrary are less than convincing.



Never-in-doubt: thanks for posting a link for my quote, I mistakenly did not attribute due credit to the source.
Further information on the origin of the quote is - as always - available from wikipedia and elsewhere.

ThinkingOfLinking

I can't think of any high street/chain retailers accepting cheques for more than a year (eg Tesco, TK Maxx, Wetherspoons), but independent ones still do, and I have found this invaluable, eg when I was at Glastonbury the other day and ran out of cash, the lady on the stall accepted a cheque. I hope they're not done away with completely. Another reason is sometimes I get cash in the mail, and given that I tend to live in communal housing and/or cheap (dodgy!) areas as well as our postie just sticking recorded delivery items through the door with no signature, I'd rather have a cheque, to be safe.

D1zzy

How's grandma gonna give the kids their b'day money if she can't write a cheque. At the mo - she just stick a cheque in their card - having it just appear in a bank account's just not the same even if she could work out how to do it.
Do they still do postal orders?...........;)

never-in-doubt

D1zzy wrote: »

How's grandma gonna give the kids their b'day money if she can't write a cheque. At the mo - she just stick a cheque in their card - having it just appear in a bank account's just not the same even if she could work out how to do it.
Do they still do postal orders?...........;)

LOL, well spotted - how does granny give the grandkids money? Thinking about it mine always sends a cheque - she can't even store a number into her phone (normal landline phone) so she'd never grasp internet banking etc etc etc!!

Postal orders are charged, i.e. they aint free.......

97trophy

Received this message today from hsbc.

your debit card is changing from a Maestro card to a Visa card......................
The cheque guarantee limit on your card may have changed or been removed. We've reviewed this because the use of cheques with cheque guarantee cards has declined in recent years and many retailers no longer accept them for payment. .

Things are moving more quickly then I thought.

ThinkingOfLinking

I hope my bank offers me a Visa; I have a Maestro and not everywhere accepts them, eg the Hoxton Hotel sale, I can never take part in as you need a Mastercard or Visa and I have neither...

never-in-doubt

97trophy wrote: »

Received this message today from hsbc.

Things are moving more quickly then I thought.

Heyup matey - thing to remember is with HSBC if you ask them for the CGC they will issue it. However i've had my new card and it had the CG symbol on it, I think they are valid until the end of cheques.....

Just wait and see what they send you, should be like-for-like so if you had a CG before your new card will have one.